The role of nelarabine in the treatment of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia: literature review and own experience

Aim. The analysis of experience of nelarabine use in refractory/relapsed T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) depending on the immunophenotype and the line of therapy. Materials and methods. All the patients with relapsed or refractory T-ALL aged from 0 to 18 years who received treatment with nelarabine as a part of the therapeutic element R6 were included in the study. For all patients a detailed immunological analysis of leukemia cells with discrimination of immunological variants TI, TII, TIII or TIV was performed. Patients administered with nelarabine as a first therapeutic element were referred to the first-line therapy group, other patients were referred to the second-line therapy group. Nelarabine was administered as intravenous infusion at a dose of 650 mg/m2, on days 1-5. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cells transplantation (allo-HSCT) was considered for all patients. Results. From 2009 to 2017, 54 patients with refractory/relapsed T-ALL were treated with nelarabine. Five-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) was 28% for all patients, cumulative risk of relapse (CIR) was 27%. EFS was significantly higher in nelarabine first-line therapy group in comparison with second-line therapy group (34±8% vs 8±8%, p=0,05). In patients after allo-HSCT EFS, OS and CIR were 51±10%, 50±10% and 39,1±9,5% accordingly. The best results were achieved in patients with TI immunophenotype. No toxicity-related mortality as well as severe neurologic complications or discontinuation of therapy associated with use of nelarabine were reported. Conclusion. The use of nelarabine is an effective strategy for the treatment of relapsed and refractory T-ALL. The best treatment outcomes were obtained in patients with TI immunophenotype and in the first-line therapy group. Optimal dosage regimens can be established during controlled clinical trials

Flow cytometric minimal residual disease monitoring in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated by regimens with reduced intensity

191 consecutive unselected children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia aged from 1 to 16 years were enrolled in the study. Bone marrow samples were obtained at the time of initial diagnostics as well as at days 15 (n = 188), 36 (n = 191), and 85 (n = 187) of remission induction. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed by 6–10-color flow cytometry. Flow cytometry data at day 15 allowed distinguishing three patients groups with significantly different outcome (p ˂ 0.0001): 35.64 % patients with MRD < 0.1 % represented 5-year event-free survival (EFS) of 100 %; 48.40 % cases with 0.1 % ≤ MRD< 10 % had EFS 84.6 ± 4.2 %; 15.96 % patients with very high MRD (≥ 10 %) belonged to group with poor outcome (EFS 56.7 ± 9.0 %). At the end of remission induction (day 36) 36 children (18.85 %) with MRD higher than 0.1 % had significantly worse outcome compared to remaining ones (EFS 49.4 ± 9.0 and 93.5 ± 2.1 % respectively; p ˂ 0.0001). From a clinical standpoint it is relevant to evaluate both low-risk and high-risk criteria. Multivariate analysis showed that day 15 MRD data is better for low-risk patients definition while end-induction MRD is the strongest unfavorable prognostic factor

STANDARDIZATION OF FLOW CYTOMETRIC MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE MONITORING IN CHILDREN WITH B-CELL PRECURSOR ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKEMIA. RUSSIA–BELARUS MULTICENTER GROUP EXPERIENCE

We developed and implemented in multicenter setting the standardized approach for flow cytometric minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring in childhood B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL).  Participation of multicenter group reference laboratories in several ring trial studies demonstrated high concordance rate between participants. Successful integration of one additional laboratory in the multicenter group has shown good level of our approach reproducibility. These results will allow implementing MRD detection in stratification system of pediatric ALL treatment protocols of Russia-Belarus multicenter group